Blackwater mercs drew weapons on the U.S. Army.

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Pabster
You can find a few bad apples in any bunch. When the bunch is as large as Blackwater, you're bound to find even more. What is ridiculous are the partisan hacks trying to paint the entire organization as evil based on the (alleged) conduct of a few. Not surprisingly, these same hacks do the same exact thing with the US Army and whatever other large group happens to be their talking points attack of the day. It's shameful, disgraceful, and disgusting. :thumbsdown: :| :thumbsdown:

There are a lot more witnesses to and evidence of far more to support the idea that there's more than one of those alleged incidents of misconduct by Blackwater than you could provide to disprove them or even suggest they didn't happen. In any case, there's enough evidence that the charges against Blackwater deserve to be investigated fully.

And I'd rather be thought of as a "partisan hack" who opposed your MURDEROUS TRAITOR IN CHIEF and his war of LIES than to be known as lying sycophant who supported him and continued to repeat his lies and gloss over his crimes, even after all the evidence against him was so public and so obvious. :roll:

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: JD50
Ah ok, so as long as people know your first and last name, and you are insulting a known general, then thats ok. But if you are an anonymous poster that insults an anonymous Colonel, then that is just OUTRAGEOUS!!!! :| :thumbsdown::| :| :thumbsdown::|
:| :thumbsdown::|

My original post about this was directed at The Yeti, who called the Colonel who reported the incident a "furious no named colonel" without knowing anything about either the incident or the Colonel he so cavalierly dismissed, and despite the fact that he doesn't have the courage to show his own name in his profile on a forum that's a lot less dangerous than Iraq, and despite the fact that, unlike the Colonel, disclosing his name wouldn't jeopardize his career.

If the story and the Colonel are for real, his service to the nation demands that he should be shown more respect than to be called a "furious no named colonel" by someone while he's too chickenshit to disclose his own name. Even (or especially) mindless neocon parrots who make such a point of proclaiming their pseudo-patriotism and faux respect for the armed forces should be able to comprehend that.

Then, some other jackass who only has the balls to disclose his first and middle initials, but not his name, then called me an "no name anonymous poster," presumably referring to my posts about General Petraeus, but completely igonring the fact that I'm hardly no name or anonymous. My profile is enabled, showing my full, real name and a real e-mail address, and I've posted more than enough info about myself that anyone who wants to find me can.

Now, that same initialed but nameless jackass thinks he can score points by ignoring his own bullshit because I criticized a well known General with enough well known baggage that it's made national news and been discussed by the media, by Congress and by high ranking members of the military, itself.

Are you always such a monumental jackoff, or do you just play one on AT? :roll:

And if you don't like me calling the current President TRAITOR IN CHIEF or a MURDERER of the 3,826 American troops killed in his WAR OF LIES as of 10/13/07 11:39 am EDT, you can explain it to all of their families and friends.

If you don't have time for that, you're welcome to :lips: my (_|_).

Harvey, you're delving way too deep into this. I was merely pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in YOU getting OUTRAGED that someone dare insult a Colonel.

Not wanting anyone that happens to look at this site see your full name has nothing to do with courage. I'd gladly tell you, or anyone else that I regularly talk to here my full name, but I'm not putting it out there for everyone in the world to see. And by "no name", I meant insignificant, like every single person on this message board is. But hey, at least I got more than a cut and paste out of you. :thumbsup:

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Lemon law
And when blackwater mercs hold US troops at gun point, they are a wee mite out of control. And as the past incidents come out of the woodwork, only a fool discounts all of them.

Only a "fool" or is it a "tool" would opine that we should call them guilty without it being proven. Or have you forgotten the basic tenets of the USA?

Have you forgotten that the Blackwater mercs can't face trial because there is a law that says the law can't touch them? And since they can never be brought to trial they can never be proven guilty,so by your reasoning they are innocent.
So without the possibility of trial, it is in the court of public opinion.
Based on what I have read, they are guilty.
Then again by your reasoning Stalin and Hitler are innocent.

 

[Lemon law]

Since the blackwater authority may have technically lapsed in 2006, they may actually be liable.

Nor do I think that the Iraqi videos will not be shown to the public. Then we may be better able to judge what our government has already seen.

But I have long advocated all private security companies are a bad idea, and now the GWB fix of having the US supervise everyone of their conveys now destroys any allegations that somehow private mercenary out sourced saves bucks. An FBI agent in every convoy and a video camera on every vehicle will cost big bucks.

Yes there are likely to be congressional inquiries and hope fully we will have good riddance to the bad ideas of using private security contractors.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I see Jd50 comes up with the absurd with-----This coming from the no name anonymous poster that calls a 4 star General who was putting his ass on the line fighting for your freedom a traitor? What a hypocrite.

The point is that General Petraeus's greatest hazard is getting paper cuts or in having falling paper clips get in his shoes. He is almost the last person on earth putting his life on the line in Iraq. Others US troops put their life on the line in Iraq, General Petraeus is definitely not one of them.
If Patraeus policies end up saving lives and ending the conflict in Iraq, Patraeus deserves praise, if Patraeus is simply an apologist for failed policies not even he believes in, then he deserves every bit of scorn that can be heaped on him. Since the jury is still out on which, we must consider all points of view on their merits.

In every conflict there is a winning general and a losing general. At least in a conventional war. When it came to Vietnam and an occupation, the whole damn US army could not come up with even one winning general. And it sure was not due to a lack of Generals. And had more to do with a bunch of clueless idiots that we had an over abundance of lacking the personal courage to tell the Presidents involved that they were full of shit. And even if we lost some 58,000 US troops in Vietnam, I can't think of a single General who died in combat putting their ass on the line.

You do realize that they don't just start out as Generals right?

Paper soldier grows up to be paper general, you know, like, what's in Petraeus's service record. Paper pusher.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: techs
What is surprising is your opinon that most Blackwater mercs are ok, its just few bad apples. What do you base it on? Maybe most of the Blackwater guys are thugs and goons.

I can vouch for the opposite - the majority of them are decent and courageous veterans who do a very honorable job.

But, then again, wtf do I know? I've only worked with them in both theaters...

You seem to have recycled what you said back during Abu Ghraib. Don't you realize these guys are NOT the U.S. military. They deserve no "benefit of the doubt" that we should give the military.

They're still Americans. And, even if they weren't, have you entirely given up on the concept of innocent until proven guilty? Should this basic tenet of our country be completely dismissed based solely on the lack of an adequate justice system in Iraq?

Wow...

Should every employee of Enron be condemned for the actions of a few?

Here's what we know: On at least a few occasions there is very strong evidence that Blackwater killed what were apparently innocent people. And that they operate above the law.

beyond hearsay, what exactly is this "strong evidence" you refer to? do tell!

Until I have some evidence that most are ok, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt like I do the military.

annnnnd now we're back to the guilty until proven innocent nonsense!

It's nice to know that you only approve of fairness, justice, or equality when they suit your agenda!

GG...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I hope this incident results in vast improvements to the Iraqi judicial and law enforcement apparatus which result in accountability and the proper prosecution of future crimes committed by any American in Iraq. That said, I also refuse to dismiss the basic tenet of innocence until proven guilt.

Condemning these men based solely on public opinion and tainted perceptions would be a crime in and of itself!

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: techs
Based on what I have read, they are guilty.

I want you to read those words a few hundred times until you realize just how absolutely horrific they are...

so much for Liberty and Justice for all!

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: techs
Based on what I have read, they are guilty.

I want you to read those words a few hundred times until you realize just how absolutely horrific they are...

so much for Liberty and Justice for all!

What an idiotic post palehorse74, your implication is that despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary we should assume they are innocent as the new driven snow until convicted. And allow blackwater to conduct business as usual until they are convicted????????

Criminal law does not work that way. In cases of cold blooded murder, the custom is to arrest the suspect and hold them without bail on evidence that strong. They are still innocent until proven guilty but they are not allowed the freedom meanwhile.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Paper soldier grows up to be paper general, you know, like, what's in Petraeus's service record. Paper pusher.

Then Petraeus still has one up on you. Paper Pusher > Keyboard Commando :laugh:

 

[Hacp]

None of this news is shocking or new. We all know that the cowboy mercenaries that Bush hired would do what they were hired to do, act like cowboy mercenaries.

 

[ntdz]

If this is true then not only should Blackwater be dismantled as a corporation, but the mercs who pulled guns on U.S. Troops should be tried for treason. Most ridiculous thing I think I've ever heard.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: techs
Based on what I have read, they are guilty.

I want you to read those words a few hundred times until you realize just how absolutely horrific they are...

so much for Liberty and Justice for all!

What an idiotic post palehorse74, your implication is that despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary we should assume they are innocent as the new driven snow until convicted. And allow blackwater to conduct business as usual until they are convicted????????

Criminal law does not work that way. In cases of cold blooded murder, the custom is to arrest the suspect and hold them without bail on evidence that strong. They are still innocent until proven guilty but they are not allowed the freedom meanwhile.

Please produce this "overwhelming evidence" you speak of. Beyond hearsay and other circumstantial evidence, I have yet to see ANY proper forensic evidence that would prove their guilt... let alone beyond any reasonable doubt..

It's ironic that you would bring up [US] criminal law, because the total lack of real evidence would lead to an immediate acquittal in any decent US court.

So, I think it's very clear whose post is "idiotic," and it ain't mine! Face it, you and yours are ready to hang these men based on the misperceptions you've garnered from cable news and other forms of bullsh*t media... and that's about as un-American as it gets.

You are also only enjoying this witchhunt because some of you actually believe that you've discovered the Achilles Heel in our mission in Iraq that you've been having wet dreams about since day one... But in reality, this issue will fade out, like every other, long before it does any real damage to our mission over there.

 

[Red Dawn]

Noty much love for War Profiteers.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: techs
Based on what I have read, they are guilty.

I want you to read those words a few hundred times until you realize just how absolutely horrific they are...

so much for Liberty and Justice for all!

What an idiotic post palehorse74, your implication is that despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary we should assume they are innocent as the new driven snow until convicted. And allow blackwater to conduct business as usual until they are convicted????????

Criminal law does not work that way. In cases of cold blooded murder, the custom is to arrest the suspect and hold them without bail on evidence that strong. They are still innocent until proven guilty but they are not allowed the freedom meanwhile.

Please produce this "overwhelming evidence" you speak of. Beyond hearsay and other circumstantial evidence, I have yet to see ANY proper forensic evidence that would prove their guilt... let alone beyond any reasonable doubt..

It's ironic that you would bring up [US] criminal law, because the total lack of real evidence would lead to an immediate acquittal in any decent US court.

So, I think it's very clear whose post is "idiotic," and it ain't mine! Face it, you and yours are ready to hang these men based on the misperceptions you've garnered from cable news and other forms of bullsh*t media... and that's about as un-American as it gets.

You are also only enjoying this witchhunt because some of you actually believe that you've discovered the Achilles Heel in our mission in Iraq that you've been having wet dreams about since day one... But in reality, this issue will fade out, like every other, long before it does any real damage to our mission over there.

Yes, numerous eye witnesses including US soldiers, as well as physical evidence would clearly lead to an immediate acquittal in any decent US court.
Yeah, right.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: palehorse74
You are also only enjoying this witchhunt because some of you actually believe that you've discovered the Achilles Heel in our mission...

Would you care to define "our mission" in Iraq? Your TRAITOR IN CHIEF hasn't been able to keep one definition floating on his ocean of LIES do so since day one. :roll:

 

[Lemon law]

Palehorse74 asks--------Please produce this "overwhelming evidence" you speak of. Beyond hearsay and other circumstantial evidence, I have yet to see ANY proper forensic evidence that would prove their guilt... let alone beyond any reasonable doubt..

To start we have the Iraqi video tapes of the convoy in question. No the public has not viewed them but you can bet the Iraqi authorities and US authorities have. Then we have the testimony of our troops held at gun point and lots of other eye witness accounts. Sorry there is entirely too much evidence, palehorse74, to support your contention these are just isolated incidents.

Then you come up with another totally unsupported zinger-----You are also only enjoying this witchhunt because some of you actually believe that you've discovered the Achilles Heel in our mission in Iraq that you've been having wet dreams about since day one.

Our mission in Iraq is not the issue in this thread. The issue is should we be using private security firms and my answer is no no no and a thousand times no. If anything, the private security firms being above the law hurt our mission in Iraq. And its OUR TROOPS that pay the price in anger generated.

It sure sounds to me like Palehorse74 has wet dreams about taking the big bucks blackwater pays so he too can be above any laws as he visits violence on those weaker than himself.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Palehorse74 asks--------Please produce this "overwhelming evidence" you speak of. Beyond hearsay and other circumstantial evidence, I have yet to see ANY proper forensic evidence that would prove their guilt... let alone beyond any reasonable doubt..

To start we have the Iraqi video tapes of the convoy in question. No the public has not viewed them but you can bet the Iraqi authorities and US authorities have. Then we have the testimony of our troops held at gun point and lots of other eye witness accounts. Sorry there is entirely too much evidence, palehorse74, to support your contention these are just isolated incidents.

Like I said, do you have anything, at all, beyond hearsay, circumstantial evidence, or FUD?

I'm still waiting.

I sincerely hope you never end up on jury duty...

Our mission in Iraq is not the issue in this thread.

Bullsh*t. Now you're lying to yourself!

The issue is should we be using private security firms and my answer is no no no and a thousand times no. If anything, the private security firms being above the law hurt our mission in Iraq. And its OUR TROOPS that pay the price in anger generated.

That topic is certainly worthy of debate, and I've already stated my opinion on the matter concerning accountability measures and future prosecutions.

The funny thing is, I don't see the Democrat congress doing anything about it... instead, they just keep throwing out soundbites to discredit Blackwater because it continues to flame the anti-war fires quite effectively.

It sure sounds to me like Palehorse74 has wet dreams about taking the big bucks blackwater pays so he too can be above any laws as he visits violence on those weaker than himself.

For the record, every time I have ever stepped foot downrange, I have done so on military orders. I have turned down numerous offers for $200k, or more, because I do not wish to deploy as a contractor.

Besides, I'm no longer in the infantry, and my new line of work no longer involves "visiting violence" on anyone - which I never enjoyed anyways.

Face it, Blackwater is nothing more than the latest target for you in your eternal quest to discredit our mission in Iraq. That might be bad enough, but you've also decided to hang every BW employee based on nothing more than what you've read or heard about them in the media.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: ntdz
If this is true then not only should Blackwater be dismantled as a corporation, but the mercs who pulled guns on U.S. Troops should be tried for treason. Most ridiculous thing I think I've ever heard.

QFT

 

[The Yeti]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Palehorse74 asks--------Please produce this "overwhelming evidence" you speak of. Beyond hearsay and other circumstantial evidence, I have yet to see ANY proper forensic evidence that would prove their guilt... let alone beyond any reasonable doubt..

To start we have the Iraqi video tapes of the convoy in question. No the public has not viewed them but you can bet the Iraqi authorities and US authorities have. Then we have the testimony of our troops held at gun point and lots of other eye witness accounts. Sorry there is entirely too much evidence, palehorse74, to support your contention these are just isolated incidents.

Like I said, do you anything, at all, beyond hearsay, circumstantial evidence, or FUD?

I'm still waiting.

I sincerely hope you never end up on jury duty...

Our mission in Iraq is not the issue in this thread.

Bullsh*t. Now you're lying to yourself!

The issue is should we be using private security firms and my answer is no no no and a thousand times no. If anything, the private security firms being above the law hurt our mission in Iraq. And its OUR TROOPS that pay the price in anger generated.

That topic is certainly worthy of debate, and I've already stated my opinion on the matter concerning accountability measures and future prosecutions.

The funny thing is, I don't see the Democrat congress doing anything about it... instead, they just keep throwing out soundbites to discredit Blackwater because it continues to flame the anti-war fires quite effectively.

It sure sounds to me like Palehorse74 has wet dreams about taking the big bucks blackwater pays so he too can be above any laws as he visits violence on those weaker than himself.

For the record, every time I have ever stepped foot downrange, I have done so on military orders. I have turned down numerous of offers for $200k, or more, because I do not desire to deploy as a contractor.

Besides, I'm no longer in the infantry, and my new line of work no longer involves "visiting violence" on anyone - which I never enjoyed anyways.

Face it, Blackwater is nothing more than the latest target for you in your eternal quest to discredit our mission in Iraq. That might be bad enough, but you've also decided to hang every BW employees based on nothing more than what you've read or heard about them in the media.

+1. All Talk and no proof. Just another bandwagon opportunity to voice their political views. Half the crap they spew is from their imagination. I bet a stroll down Irish with the average PSD would remedy that in a New York minute. You hit the nail right on the head with this one.

Y.

 

[1EZduzit]

Blackwater and me: A love story it ain't - By Robert Bateman - October 12, 2007

Robert Bateman is a historian and U.S. Army infantry officer. He served in Iraq in 2005 and 2006. His most recent book is "No Gun Ri: A Military History of the Korean War Incident."

What employees of the private security firm care about, and I have heard this from the Blackwaters with whom I interacted in Iraq, is their paycheck. They care about their huge compensation packages, and about getting home alive to spend them. Blackwater USA has already taken in more than $1 billion from the public coffers.

 

[Lemon law]

Lets examine the latest Eric Prince excuse for the latest incident on Video that has so outraged the Iraqis. Just minutes ago featured on 60 minutes.

But the Eric Prince contention is that everything is justified because a FEW shots were indeed fired at them. A contention even our military investigators deny.

I don't know about you, but in the USA, on our highways and byways, I frequently encounter military convoys. As a licensed driver with car insurance I have a right to those domestic highways and so do our military convoys. Suppose God Forbid, some crazed sniper starts taking pot shots at the motor vehicles. Something that in fact occurred on the very roads I drive on within the past year. Would then the same military convoy be justified in taking pot shots at ANY vehicle that has an equal right to be on the road? Killing perhaps an innocent me or some of my loved ones. Or even my likewise my fellow innocent Americans.

Even if shots were fired, would we tolerate that in the USA? I for one think not. Why should our standards be different elsewhere? But the Eric Prince standards is that any level of violence is not only permitted but advisable regardless of who is hit and regardless of the threat level.

If Eric Prince is so clueless as to come up with just that defense as even a partial justification, we should give him the ole heave ho ASAP. Just the defense alone demonstrates extreme moral bankruptcy.

 

[techs]

Apparently Palehorse74 is unaware that both an Iraqi government report AND a US Army investigation have conclued that the Blackwater mercs were unprovoked and killed the Iraqis with no cause.
I saw it on the 60 minutes interview with the head of Blackwater. He did not deny this. He says we should wait for the Justice Department report.
So I guess the US Army is not good enough for Blackwater. Only some government beauracrats can truly judge Blackwater.
I guess he never met Palehorse74

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: techs
Apparently Palehorse74 is unaware that both an Iraqi government report AND a US Army investigation have conclued that the Blackwater mercs were unprovoked and killed the Iraqis with no cause.
I saw it on the 60 minutes interview with the head of Blackwater. He did not deny this. He says we should wait for the Justice Department report.
So I guess the US Army is not good enough for Blackwater. Only some government beauracrats can truly judge Blackwater.
I guess he never met Palehorse74

Surely you are not talking about whitewash palehorse74? After all he was not there but he alone can judge.

 

[Moonbeam]

When Martial Law is established Blackwater will be drawing weapons on Democrats. They need the practice.

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
When Martial Law is established Blackwater will be drawing weapons on Democrats. They need the practice.

Blackwater is always for hire. If the money is good the target follows. have gun will travel.